Distracted Marine Operations: Beyond the Cellular Telephone

The U.S. Coast Guard’s most recent Safety Advisory is well worth reading. In a nutshell, the Coast Guard says that, across all transportation modes, safety initiatives are being established to address issues related to Distracted Operations. Recognizing the importance of this issue and understanding the potential consequences caused by increased operational risk in marine operations, our DHS department is supportive of the goals and objectives of the U.S. Department of Transportation and other distracted driving safety initiatives. Fair enough. From my perspective, however, mobile telephones are only the tip of the iceberg – especially when it comes to the technology overload facing today’s commercial mariners.

• Misplaced Priorities

Not too long ago, a friend (who also happens to be a state-licensed U.S. harbor pilot) told me of a situation which occurred during the inbound leg on a U.S.-flag tanker. The routine 3-hour movement was well underway in a routine fashion when, about 30 minutes before arriving at the berth, the Third Mate’s cellular phone began chirping. On the bridge at the time were four mariners; the Master, our Pilot, the Third Mate and the helmsman. Beyond the irritating ring tone selected by the young and ‘hip’ deck officer, the fact that he actually answered the call and began a conversation with whomever was on the other end was particularly disconcerting to the marine pilot. Nevertheless, he decided not to usurp the Master’s authority on the bridge and intervene.

What happened next was even more disturbing. The pilot told me later, “While I honestly couldn’t believe that he had answered the call, what really set me off was the fact that the Captain – a mere twenty feet away – said and did nothing to end the situation.” Eventually, and fully five minutes later, the mate ended the call, tucked his latest generation mobile device into his front pocket and resumed his disinterested pose, leaning against the control console. “Initially, I was mostly curious to see what the old man would do. In the end, I suppose I should’ve been happy that the mate didn’t begin texting to his girlfriend or perhaps check his portfolio while recording bells,” the Pilot added for emphasis. The practice is probably more widespread than one might think. 

• Technology: no panacea for incompetence

The Coast Guard Safety Advisory primarily addresses texting and inappropriately timed telephone calls from and to marine professionals while engaged in critical shipboard operations. What it doesn’t talk about is the dangers of overreliance on the seemingly endless cornucopia of automated navigation and cargo gadgets. The latter situation requires a closer look.

It wasn’t too long ago when (also on the seemingly endless march to STCW compliance) I took the STCW-mandated Automatic RADAR Plotting Aids (ARPA) course down at MEBA’s CMES School in Easton, MD. As possibly the last mariner on the planet who had never been inside a bridge simulator and having last signed onto a merchant vessel in the mid-1980’s, my immediate concern was the plethora of computerized equipment that I would be asked to operate. Nevertheless, they patiently led me through the procedures and by the end of the course, I felt reasonably at home in today’s wheelhouse and frankly, much less intimidated by the prospect of having to competently stand a bridge watch, fully 25 years after last having done so. What I did not come away with – much to the credit of those running the course – was the impression that technology was the “be-all, end-all” answer to every navigational problem. I wonder if today’s freshly minted Third Mates, with all that high-tech prowess, can say the same thing.

It was during the navigational aspect of the ARPA training where I got the sense that my instructor was trying to create balance between the electronics and the basics of traditional navigation. Starting a conning evolution into Hampton Roads, he casually walked up to the ECDIS display and flipped off the power. He then looked up at me and said, nodding to the darkened screen, “You’re not gonna need this.” I found myself using the Radars as necessary, punctuated by manual bearings on the simulator screens outside the wheelhouse and the information provided on my * gasp * paper chart. And, for those who say that most aspects of STCW-mandated training are of limited value, I so far have not found that to be the case.

• Technology: How Much is Too Much?

Last week’s Safety Alert asserts that the bridge team management approach to safe navigation is an essential element of risk management and safe vessel operations. It also goes on to say, “…when mariners are navigating or working alone, the use of cellular or other devices unrelated to the operation at hand could impede the exchange of vital operational information, delay reaction time, or cause attention lapses of those involved which could result in unwanted circumstances having very serious consequences causing injuries and fatalities, material damage, and environmental impact.” All of that is true. Taking that theme further, another Safety Alert cautioning against the overreliance on technology for collision avoidance and navigation tasks would be every bit as important.

In 2010, it isn’t difficult to become lazy on the bridge. Radars, CAS inputs, ECDIS, GPS, AIS and all the rest of it are now available on most vessels. The resultant, crushing load of data can, in the right hands, provide a heightened awareness that adds up to a safer vessel. Used exclusively by the professional mariner to the detriment of everything else, the devices will eventually lead to disaster. And, it is not just today’s mariner that is guilty of this deadly sin. At the IMO level, it has actually been proposed that the requirement for celestial navigation training be dumbed down for certain certifications. I don’t think that proposal got very far, thank goodness. On the other hand, the STCW training burden is finally making its way down to the lower level, lower tonnage / LOA deck officer certificates. Not a moment too soon, says my Pilot friend, who added, “I know more than one yacht captain whose favorite (and most frequently used) electronic device is the mobile telephone.”

For those of us who, as recently as the mid-1980’s, had to hump it ashore to stand in line at the pay phone to call our girlfriends in port, today’s array of electronic aids is simply astonishing. For myself, I could have never imagined the sophistication of today’s ROV support vessels. A couple of years ago, I was called upon to profile a certain Gulf Coast operator and its high-tech fleet. A visit to the bridge of its virtually brand new, flagship ROV revealed a fully redundant, DP-2 qualified bridge layout with fore and aft conning stations, simply bristling with interconnected and overlaid electronic gadgetry. I made a mental note as I wandered around to NOT touch anything. I don’t think I even sat down. The Master on that vessel was handsomely compensated by any standard and given the skills required to monitor and operate all of that stuff on the bridge, he was probably worth every penny. I also found myself wondering what would happen if it all went down at once. When was the last time this guy had done a Radar plot, figured a “bow-and-beam” bearing or pulled his head out of the hood long enough visually witness something coming abeam?

• The Big Picture: (Hint: it is not inside the Radar hood)

The Coast Guard winds up its warning to owners, operators and mariners by saying, “The potential risk associated with improper use of cellular telephones and other devices in the marine environment while navigating or performing other vessel functions should be apparent to vessel owners and operators.” Indeed. The DHS call for the development and implementation of “effective operational policies outlining when the use of cellular telephones and other devices is appropriate or prohibited” is also very appropriate. So is the reinforcement of basic navigational and collision skills that can be accomplished with a minimum of high-tech accoutrements.

At one time, I was “on the fence” about the necessity of STCW-mandated training protocols. Not anymore. I find myself increasingly in favor of refresher modules at appropriate intervals, especially where these training courses reinforce basic skills that must be mastered before the use of laborsaving electronic devices should be contemplated. That said, I have also sailed with another deck officer, way back when, who steadfastly refused to use the Radars when out on the open ocean. He stubbornly claimed, “You don’t need them.” He outranked me at the time, so I kept my mouth shut. I also fired those Radars up immediately upon his departure from the wheelhouse whenever called upon to relieve him. Balance is the key.

By all means; and as the bumper sticker says so well, “Hang Up and Drive.” And, if ships had bumper stickers, we could also make one up that says, “Pull your head out the hood and look out the window.” As an older mariner inching my way back to the point that my license actually means something again, I can fully appreciate the value of new equipment. At the same time, today’s tech-savvy mates could use a good dose of cold-turkey withdrawal from all of the things that detract from safe operations. I hope it’s not too late – MP.

* * * * *

Joseph Keefe is the lead commentator of MaritimeProfessional.com. You can also read his work in MarineNews and The Maritime Reporter magazines. He can be reached at jkeefe@maritimeprofessional.com or at Keefe@marinelink.com. MaritimeProfessional.com is the largest business networking site devoted to the marine industry. Each day thousands of industry professionals around the world log on to network, connect, and communicate.